A. 
Purpose. The purpose of this section is to establish decision criteria and procedures for uses that, due to their unique qualities, may require additional regulations or other special degrees of control. An administrative review process, which includes public notice and comment, is required to ensure that the activity, if established, will be in full compliance with applicable regulations and that such uses are compatible with the Comprehensive Plan, adjacent uses, and the character of the vicinity.
Administrative use permits include:
1. 
Accessory dwelling units;
2. 
RV permits;
3. 
Telecommunication facility review;
4. 
Temporary uses; and
5. 
Tree permits.
B. 
Decision Criteria. The Director shall review applications for administrative use permits in accordance with specific findings as set forth below.
1. 
Requirements and Decision Criteria Unique to Certain Uses. The development standards of this code shall be used by the applicant in preparing the administrative use permit application and by the Director in determining the acceptability of permitting a use in a certain location.
2. 
Required Findings. The Director shall grant approval of an administrative use permit if all of the criteria pertaining to that type of permit (such as a home occupation permit) and all of the following findings can be made and supported by the record:
a. 
That the granting of the proposed administrative use permit approval will not:
i. 
Be detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare;
ii. 
Adversely affect the established character of the surrounding vicinity; nor
iii. 
Be injurious to the uses, property, or improvements adjacent to, and in the vicinity of, the site upon which the proposed use is to be located;
b. 
That the granting of the proposed administrative use permit approval is consistent and compatible with the intent of goals, objectives, and policies of the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and any implementing regulation;
c. 
That all conditions necessary to mitigate the impacts of the proposed use can be monitored and enforced; and
d. 
That all requirements for a specific use have been addressed by the applicant.
C. 
Burden of Proof. The applicant has the burden of proving that the proposed use meets all criteria set forth in subsection (B)(2) of this section, Required Findings.
D. 
Approval. The Director may approve an application for an administrative use permit, approve with additional requirements above those specified in this code, or require modification of the proposal to comply with specified requirements or local conditions.
E. 
Denial. The Director may deny an application for an administrative use permit if the placement of the use would be unreasonably incompatible with the surrounding area or incapable of complying with specific standards set forth in this code, and if any of the above required findings are not supported by evidence in the record as determined by the Director.
(Ord. 307 § 2, 2001; Ord. 394 § 1, 2003; Ord. 443 § 1 (Exh. A), 2005; Ord. 741 § 1 (Exh. R), 2020)
A. 
Purpose. The purpose of this section is to establish decision criteria and procedures for special uses, called conditional uses, which possess unique characteristics. Conditional uses are deemed unique due to factors such as size, technological processes, equipment, or location with respect to surroundings, streets, existing improvements, or demands upon public facilities. These uses require a special degree of control to assure compatibility with the Comprehensive Plan, adjacent uses, and the character of the vicinity.
Conditional uses will be subject to review by the Examiner and the issuance of a conditional use permit. This process allows the Examiner to:
1. 
Determine that the location of these uses will not be incompatible with uses permitted in the surrounding areas; and
2. 
Make further stipulations and conditions that may reasonably assure that the basic intent of this code will be served.
B. 
Decision Criteria. The Examiner shall review conditional use permit applications in accordance with the provisions of this section and may approve, approve with conditions, modify, modify with conditions, or deny the conditional use permit. The Examiner may reduce or increase bulk requirements, off-street parking requirements, and use design standards to lessen impacts, as a condition of the granting of the conditional use permit.
1. 
Required Findings. The Examiner may use design standards and other elements in this code to modify the proposal. A conditional use permit may be approved only if all of the following findings can be made regarding the proposal and are supported by the record:
a. 
That the granting of the proposed conditional use permit will not:
i. 
Be detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare;
ii. 
Adversely affect the established character of the surrounding vicinity; nor
iii. 
Be injurious to the uses, property, or improvements adjacent to, and in the vicinity of, the site upon which the proposed use is to be located;
b. 
That the granting of the proposed conditional use permit is consistent and compatible with the intent of the vision statement, goals, and policies of the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and any implementing regulation;
c. 
That all conditions necessary to lessen any impacts of the proposed use can be monitored and enforced;
d. 
That the proposed use will not introduce hazardous conditions at the site that cannot be mitigated to protect adjacent properties, the vicinity, and the public health, safety, and welfare of the community from such hazard;
e. 
That the conditional use will be supported by, and not adversely affect, adequate public facilities and services, or that conditions can be imposed to lessen any adverse impacts on such facilities and services; and
f. 
That the level of service standards for public facilities and services are met in accordance with the concurrency management requirements.
C. 
Additional Required Findings for Public Facilities.
1. 
That the granting of the proposed conditional use permit is consistent and compatible with the intent of the goals, objectives and policies of comprehensive, general or utility plans for sewage, stormwater, water, solid waste, park and recreation, transportation or other facility plans, capital facility plan or capital improvement programs;
2. 
That the facility site and environmental designs:
a. 
Meet local and State siting criteria and design requirements adopted as standard mitigation and as administrated by local and State agencies; and
b. 
Have been reviewed and commented upon by local and State agencies responsible for issuing permits; and
3. 
That all yards, open spaces, landscaping, walls and fences, and other buffering features are properly provided to mitigate the impacts of the facility to make it compatible with the character of the surrounding area.
D. 
Burden of Proof. The applicant has the burden of proving that the proposed conditional use meets all of the criteria in subsection (B)(1) of this section, Required Findings.
E. 
Approval. The Examiner may approve an application for a conditional use permit, approve with additional requirements above those specified in this code or require modification of the proposal to comply with specified requirements or local conditions.
F. 
Denial. The Examiner shall deny a conditional use permit if the proposal does not meet or cannot be conditioned or modified to meet subsection (B)(1) of this section, Required Findings.
(Ord. 307 § 2, 2001; Ord. 394 § 1, 2003; Ord. 443 § 1 (Exh. A), 2005; Ord. 741 § 1 (Exh. R), 2020)
A. 
Purpose. The purpose of this section is to provide a means of altering the requirements of this code in specific instances where the strict application of those requirements would deprive a property of privileges enjoyed by other properties with the identical regulatory zone because of special features or constraints unique to the property involved.
B. 
Administrative and Examiner Variances. There are two types of variances hereby established. A “minor” or administrative variance, and a “major” or Examiner variance. An administrative variance is one which is within 25 percent of the standard contained in the code. An Examiner variance is one that is greater than 25 percent of the standard contained in the code. Both types are based on the same decision criteria, as found in subsection (E) of this section.
C. 
Granting of Variances. The Director and the Examiner shall have the authority to grant a variance from the provisions of this code, when, in their opinions, the conditions as set forth in subsections (E) and (F) of this section have been found to exist. In such cases a variance may be granted which is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this code so that the spirit of this code shall be observed, public safety and welfare secured, and substantial justice done. The Director or Examiner shall only grant the minimum necessary variance to grant relief to the applicant.
D. 
Variances shall not relieve an applicant from any of the procedural provisions of this title, from any standard or provision that specifically states that no variance from such standard or provision is permitted, or from conditions of approval established during prior permit review. A variance shall not allow establishment of a use that is not otherwise permitted in the zone, including the creation of lots or densities that exceed the base residential density of the zone. A variance cannot be used to relieve an applicant from any of the provisions of the critical areas code, except for the required buffer widths.
E. 
Decision Criteria. Before any variance may be granted, it shall be shown that the applicant demonstrates all of the following:
1. 
That the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the Comprehensive Plan;
2. 
That there are special circumstances applicable to the subject property or to the intended use such as shape, topography, location, or surroundings that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone;
3. 
That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right or use possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone but which because of special circumstances is denied to the property in question;
4. 
That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvement in such vicinity and zone in which the subject property is located;
5. 
That strict enforcement of the provisions of this title creates an unnecessary hardship to the property owner; and
6. 
That the need for the variance is not the result of deliberate actions of the applicant or property owner.
F. 
Burden of Proof. The applicant has the burden of proving that the proposed variance meets all of the criteria in subsection (E) of this section, Decision Criteria.
G. 
Approval. The Director or Examiner may approve an application for a variance, approve with additional requirements above those specified in this code or require modification of the proposal to comply with specified requirements or local conditions.
H. 
Denial. The Director or Examiner shall deny a variance if the proposal does not meet or cannot be conditioned or modified to meet subsection (E) of this section, Decision Criteria.
(Ord. 307 § 2, 2001; Ord. 330 § 1, 2001; Ord. 394 § 1, 2003; Ord. 443 § 1 (Exh. A), 2005; Ord. 741 § 1 (Exh. R), 2020)
A. 
Public Facility Permits Repealed. Existing public facility permits are considered conditional use permits. Public facilities allowed subject to a conditional use permit must meet the required findings in UPMC § 19.85.020(C).
B. 
Recognition of Previously Granted Permits for Public Facilities. Any previously granted development permit, zoning permit or otherwise lawfully established public facility and/or activity, which existed prior to the effective date of these regulations, is hereby acknowledged and reaffirmed by these provisions. These previously granted authorities include but are not limited to unclassified use permit, conditional use permit, nonconforming use permit, planned development district, planned unit development, conditional change in zone, variances, and similar permits and approvals.
Each of these previously granted authorities is hereby defined as an existing and approved conditional use permit under these regulations, subject to any specific conditions imposed on the approval of said authority. Any public facility and/or activity which does not possess one of these authorities, but has been legally established prior to the effective date of these regulations, shall be defined as an existing and approved public facility permit, but shall be subject to the limitations imposed on all legally established uses under the bulk regulations and special use design standards until the specific permit is amended pursuant to these regulations.
Any facility or activity which possesses a conditional use permit as established herein shall not be defined as a nonconforming use under these regulations. Existing State and Federal permits, including, but not limited to, Federal mining permits and leases, surface mine permits (SM), National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permits (NPDES), and solid waste permits may be used to aid in the establishment of a public facility permit for any existing facility or activity. The Department shall establish and maintain a list of these permits.
(Formerly 19.85.050. Ord. 307 § 2, 2001; Ord. 330 § 2, 2001; Ord. 394 § 1, 2003; Ord. 443 § 1 (Exh. A), 2005; Ord. 559 § 11 (Exh. A), 2009; Ord. 741 § 1 (Exh. R), 2020)
A. 
Purpose. The purpose of this section is to establish procedures for the review of projects subject to design standard review including small lot and multifamily developments, all new development, major improvements, major redevelopments and exterior alterations. When expanding the footprint of an existing building that is nonconforming with regard to its distance from the edge of a sidewalk, the building footprint shall be expanded in the direction of the sidewalk to decrease the nonconforming setback, unless it can be demonstrated this is not structurally possible. Renovation of an existing single-family structure for residential use is exempt from this section, provided no expansion of the structure occurs.
The design review process is intended to enable the City to evaluate development proposals with respect to architectural design, landscape design, urban form, pedestrian and vehicular circulation, utility design, and site characteristics. The process allows the City to condition development proposals to ensure their compatibility with adjoining uses, compliance with development regulations, and consistency with Comprehensive Plan goals, objectives and policies. The process is intended to ensure that all critical design issues are addressed early in the site planning and review stages of project development.
B. 
Authority. The Director is authorized to review development proposals subject to design standard review. The Director may approve, approve with conditions, modify and approve with conditions, or deny, the application for design standard review. The City shall grant design approval when the Director has determined that the criteria listed in subsection (C) of this section have been met by the proposal. The Director may impose specific conditions upon the use, including an increase in the standards of this title, which will enable the Director to make the required findings in subsection (C) of this section. These conditions may include, but are not limited to: restrictions on locations of structures and uses; structural restrictions that address safety, noise, light and glare, vibration, views, aesthetics, and other impacts; and increased buffering requirements, including open space, berms, fencing and landscaping.
C. 
Criteria for Design Standard Review Approval. Before any design standard approval may be granted, the Director shall adopt written findings showing that the following criteria are met by the proposal:
1. 
The proposed use and site design will not: be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity; or adversely affect the established character of the surrounding vicinity.
2. 
The proposed use and site design will meet or exceed all applicable development, performance and design standards and conform to the intent of the design guidelines that apply to the specific use, location, or zoning classification.
3. 
The proposed use and site design will be consistent and compatible with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
4. 
All conditions necessary to lessen any impacts of the proposed use are measurable and can be monitored and enforced.
5. 
All applicable standards are met or when the applicant requests a departure from the design standards in which case the following affirmative findings are required:
a. 
That the departure from the design standards is consistent with both the Comprehensive Plan and with the intent statements of the design standards.
b. 
That departure from the strict application of the design standards will not have a significant negative impact on the public, or surrounding properties, or on the character of the zone.
c. 
That the proposal creates an equal or better environment, results in an equal or better use of land and an equal or better design than that which could be produced through the strict application of the design standards.
d. 
That the departures from the design standards are compensated by the provision of additional design features and amenities in the development plan that would not normally be required. The additional design features and amenities must be of equal or greater design benefit and function.
D. 
Application Procedures. Design standard review is classified as a Type II application. The processing procedures for this application are described in Chapter 22.05 UPMC.
E. 
Preapplication Review. Applicants are encouraged to schedule a preapplication meeting with the City’s technical review committee prior to formal project application. An applicant may present schematic sketches and a general outline of the proposal for a preliminary staff review. The meeting is intended to provide a prospective applicant with information concerning application procedures, submittal requirements and design standards and guidelines that may be applicable to the proposal. The meeting is also intended to provide a prospective applicant with early input and initial design direction from City staff on the proposal. The completion of this preapplication review process does not vest any future application.
F. 
Final Design Review. The Director may determine that a design submittal generally meets the criteria listed in subsection (C) of this section but includes specific design elements that will require a more detailed review later in the design process to demonstrate full compliance. In such case, the Director may grant design review approval subject to the submittal and approval of additional detailed plans. This final design review is intended to ensure that all specific design issues identified during the Director’s initial review are fully addressed prior to issuance of a building permit, site development permit or other construction permit.
G. 
Phasing. An individual project site may be built in phases and design standards required in one phase may be deferred to the next project phase provided:
1. 
Design standards regarding prohibited use, height, setback and building design may not be deferred to a following project phase.
2. 
For each phase, the applicant must identify which design standards will be deferred to the next phase.
3. 
Prior to occupancy of any building within a single phase, a site plan indicating how the design standards are to be incorporated into the next phase must be submitted and approved by the Director. The City shall require a financial guarantee to ensure all standards are met prior to expiration of the time specified in the financial guarantee.
H. 
Submittal Requirements. Application for design standard review shall be submitted on forms provided by the City. Plans, materials, and other applicable information shall be submitted with the application in clear and intelligible form including:
1. 
A site plan drawing at a scale of not less than one inch per 50 feet that shows:
a. 
The location of all existing and proposed structures and improvements, including, but not limited to, fences, culverts, bridges, roads and streets on the subject property;
b. 
The boundaries of the property proposed to be developed and, if the property is to be subdivided, the boundaries of each proposed lot within the property;
c. 
All proposed and existing buildings and setback lines, including those located on adjoining properties;
d. 
All areas to be preserved as buffers or to be dedicated to a public, private, or community use or for open space and information regarding the percentage of area covered and size and type of existing vegetation to be removed or to be retained;
e. 
All existing and proposed easements;
f. 
The locations of all existing utility structures and lines;
g. 
The stormwater drainage systems and management plan for existing and proposed structures and parking facilities;
h. 
All means of vehicular and pedestrian ingress and egress at the site and the size and location of driveways, streets and roads;
i. 
The design of off-street parking areas showing the size and location of internal circulation and parking spaces;
j. 
The location and design of trash enclosure areas, exterior lighting, exterior signage, mechanical and utility facility areas;
2. 
Elevation plans drawn to scale for each building or structure elevation. Additions and alterations to existing structures shall be clearly identified on the plans. Design details such as exterior finish materials and textures, lighting and other fixtures, and design elements such as belt courses, brackets, chimneys, cornices, roof overhangs, window trim, sills and sashes shall be identified to assist with the review process;
3. 
Sign plan showing the location, dimensions, area, design, material, color and methods of illumination of all exterior signs;
4. 
Exterior mechanical device screening plans that identify the building elevation and site plans of all proposed exterior mechanical devices, including roof-mounted equipment, and proposed screening;
5. 
Landscape plan drawn to scale showing the locations of existing trees to be removed and to be retained on the site, the location of proposed landscaping, and location and design of irrigation systems. In addition, a plant schedule indicating species, varieties, sizes and numbers of plants to be installed, and planting specifications shall be submitted. The documentation should meet the requirements of Chapter 19.65 UPMC and demonstrate compliance with applicable design standards and guidelines;
6. 
Topographic map that delineates contours, both existing and proposed, at intervals of two feet, and that locates existing streams, wetlands, forested areas and other natural features;
7. 
A grading plan showing existing and proposed grades;
8. 
The existing zoning district of the proposed development site and any other zoning district within 300 feet of the site;
9. 
Impervious surface calculations, including: the proposed number of square feet of surfaces covered by buildings, driveways, parking lots, or any other structure covering land; the total number of square feet in the entire proposed development site; and the percentage of the site covered with impervious surface;
10. 
The proposed number of dwelling units and number of bedrooms in the development;
11. 
The proposed number of square feet in gross floor area for each residential and nonresidential use; and
12. 
For properties containing critical areas or their regulated buffers, all informational requirements specified in UPMC Title 17, Critical Areas, shall be included in the design review submittal.
I. 
Waiver of Submittal Requirements. The Director may waive the submittal requirement for any of the items listed in subsection (G) of this section when, in the reasonable discretion of the Director, the item is inapplicable or unnecessary for the completion of the design review.
J. 
Request for Additional Information. The Director may require the applicant to submit additional information or material that is necessary for the proper review of the application.
K. 
Review Fees. Design review fees must be paid at the time of submittal.
L. 
Performance Bond. The Director may require as a condition of design standard review approval that the applicant furnish the City with a performance bond, or other form of guarantee deemed acceptable by the City Attorney, to secure the applicant’s obligation to complete the provisions and conditions of the design submittal as approved. If a performance guarantee is required under this section, the property owner shall provide the City with an irrevocable notarized agreement granting the City and its agents the right to enter the property and perform any necessary work.
M. 
Expiration of Approvals. If the applicant has not submitted a complete application for a building or site development permit within two years from the date of design review approval, or if appealed within two years of the final decision on the appeal, the design review approval shall expire. The Director may grant an extension for no longer than 12 months if a written request is submitted at least 30 days prior to the expiration of the permit.
(Ord. 559 § 11 (Exh. A), 2009; Ord. 628 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013; Ord. 662 § 1 (Exh. A), 2015; Ord. 741 § 1 (Exh. R), 2020)
A. 
Amendment Standards – Discretionary Land Use Permits. This section provides the method for amending conditions of approval and final development plans that have received discretionary land use permit approval.
1. 
Minor Amendment. Minor amendments shall be consistent with the requirements set forth in subsection (A)(1)(c) of this section, and shall include, but not be limited to, adjustments to site plan and structure layout, provided the adjustment is generally consistent with the original approval; minor adjustments to site access, parking area layout, additions of fences, retaining walls, and mechanical equipment; adjustments to building height, provided the height is below the maximum allowed in the zone; and adjustments to the landscaping plans such as changes to plant materials.
The following procedures shall be required for all minor amendments:
a. 
Requests for minor amendments shall be in writing from the property owner or the owner’s authorized agent and shall fully describe the amendments requested and the reasons therefor.
b. 
Minor amendment applications may be routed for comments to any City division and to any agency with jurisdiction at the Director’s discretion.
c. 
Minor amendments shall meet all of the following requirements:
i. 
A change to a condition of approval does not modify the intent of the original condition.
ii. 
The perimeter boundaries of the original site shall not be extended by more than five percent of the original lot area.
iii. 
The proposal does not increase the overall residential density of a site.
iv. 
The proposal does not change or modify housing types.
v. 
The proposal does not reduce the designated open space.
vi. 
The proposal does not add more than five percent gross square footage of structures to the site.
vii. 
The proposal does not increase the overall impervious surface on the site by more than five percent.
viii. 
Any conditions or expansions approved through minor amendments that cumulatively exceed the requirements in this section shall be reviewed as a major amendment.
d. 
Burden of Proof. The applicant has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the proposed amendment meets all of the criteria in subsection (A)(1)(c) of this section.
e. 
Approval. The Director may approve an application for a minor amendment, approve with additional conditions, require modification of the proposal to comply with specified requirements or determine that the application shall be processed as a major amendment.
f. 
Denial. The Director shall deny an application for amendment if the proposal does not meet or cannot be conditioned to meet subsection (A)(1)(c) of this section.
g. 
The Director’s decision may be appealed as provided in UPMC Title 22.
2. 
Major Amendments.
a. 
Any modification exceeding the provisions of subsection (A)(1)(c) of this section shall be considered a major amendment and shall follow the same procedure required for a new application and fee.
b. 
Major amendments shall be subject to the most current City codes.
(Ord. 559 § 11 (Exh. A), 2009; Ord. 741 § 1 (Exh. R), 2020)
If a discretionary land use permit approval is not exercised within one year from the effective date of approval, or within five years from the effective date of a design standard review associated with a preliminary plat or short plat, it shall automatically become null and void. For good cause, the appropriate review authority (Hearings Examiner or Director) may grant a one-time extension of one year if an extension request is filed with the Department no less than 45 days prior to the date of expiration. A properly filed application for a time extension shall stay the effective date of expiration until action on the request has become final. The process for taking action on the request shall be the same used for the original discretionary land use permit application. Before taking action to grant an extension, the review authority shall adopt written findings showing that the following circumstances exist:
A. 
The proposal approved under the terms of the discretionary land use permit application originally granted remains in conformance with current development standards and design guidelines contained or referenced in this title. If the proposal would no longer conform to this title as a result of more restrictive standards or guidelines being adopted subsequent to the original approval, the review authority may consider a modified proposal that would comply with the more restrictive standards or guidelines.
B. 
The findings adopted in support of the original discretionary land use permit approval remain valid and supportive of the time extension request.
(Ord. 559 § 11 (Exh. A), 2009; Ord. 741 § 1 (Exh. R), 2020)
A. 
Purpose. The purpose of this section is to establish procedures to be followed when action is initiated to revoke a discretionary land use permit.
B. 
Authority. The Hearings Examiner may revoke or modify a major variance, conditional use permit or planned development district approval when it has determined that one or more of the grounds listed in subsection (E) of this section exists. The Director may revoke or modify an administrative use permit, minor variance or a design standard review approval when it has determined that one or more of the grounds listed in subsection (E) of this section exists.
C. 
Initiation of a Revocation. Revocation may be initiated by a request from an adversely affected property owner or other aggrieved party, a motion by the City Council to refer the matter to the Hearings Examiner, or the Director.
D. 
Procedures. Review of a motion, recommendation or request for revocation by the appropriate review authority shall be conducted in the same manner as was required for the initial consideration of the discretionary land use permit. Procedures concerning public notice, reporting and appeals shall be the same as for the initial review.
E. 
Grounds for Revocation or Modification. A revocation or modification of a discretionary land use permit by the appropriate review authority shall be made on any one or more of the following grounds:
1. 
The approval was obtained by deception, fraud or other misrepresentations;
2. 
The use for which the approval was granted has ceased to exist or has been suspended for one year or more;
3. 
The permit granted is being, or recently has been, exercised contrary to the terms or conditions of the approval or the applicable development regulations that govern the permit; or
4. 
The use for which the approval was granted was so exercised as to be detrimental to the public health or safety.
F. 
Submittal Requirements. A request for a revocation by an adversely affected property owner or other aggrieved party shall be submitted on forms provided by the Department. The party requesting the revocation shall submit a statement indicating the specific grounds listed in subsection (E) of this section that provide the basis for the request. Based on a preliminary review of the request, the Director may determine that additional information is necessary to complete the review and shall be provided by the party requesting the revocation.
(Ord. 559 § 11 (Exh. A), 2009; Ord. 741 § 1 (Exh. R), 2020)
A property owner may elect to relinquish a previously approved discretionary land use permit in order to obtain another use or density which is now permitted outright under a new zone classification. In recognition of the relinquishment, any use authorized by the discretionary land use permit shall cease, unless said use is allowed outright under the underlying zone classification. The petitioner for relinquishment shall follow the following process:
A. 
The property owner must submit in writing to the Department the request including the reasons for the relinquishment. Accompanying the request should be a copy of the original approval.
B. 
The request will be reviewed by staff to determine if any conditions of the original approval conflict with the request for relinquishment. If the conditions or terms of the discretionary land use permit conflict with the request, the request will be forwarded to the Director or Examiner, as appropriate to the original review procedure, for a decision.
C. 
The Department will respond in writing to the owner with a determination and provide the Examiner a copy of that determination.
(Ord. 559 § 11 (Exh. A), 2009; Ord. 741 § 1 (Exh. R), 2020)
Any reference to a time period, unless otherwise specifically stated, shall be calculated based upon calendar days.
(Ord. 559 § 11 (Exh. A), 2009; Ord. 741 § 1 (Exh. R), 2020)